Thank you Andrei. The problem is that I can see with 'pcs status' that resources are runnin on srv2cr1 but its at the same time its telling that the fence_vmware_soap is running on srv1cr1. That's somewhat confusing. Could you possibly explain this?
Thank you! sob., 16.03.2019, 05:37 użytkownik Andrei Borzenkov <[email protected]> napisał: > 16.03.2019 1:16, Adam Budziński пишет: > > Hi Tomas, > > > > Ok but how then pacemaker or the fence agent knows which route to take to > > reach the vCenter? > > They do not know or care at all. It is up to your underlying operating > system and its routing tables. > > > Btw. Do I have to add the stonith resource on each of the nodes or is it > > just enough to add it on one as for other resources? > > If your fencing agent can (should) be able to run on any node, it should > be enough to define it just once as long as it can properly determine > "port" to use on fencing "device" for a given node. There are cases when > you may want to restrict fencing agent to only subset on nodes or when > you are forced to set unique parameter for each node (consider IPMI IP > address), in this case you would need separate instance of agent in each > case. > > > Thank you! > > > > pt., 15.03.2019, 15:48 użytkownik Tomas Jelinek <[email protected]> > > napisał: > > > >> Dne 15. 03. 19 v 15:09 Adam Budziński napsal(a): > >>> Hello Tomas, > >>> > >>> Thank you! So far I need to say how great this community is, would > >>> never expect so much positive vibes! A big thank you your doing a great > >>> job! > >>> > >>> Now let's talk business :) > >>> > >>> So if pcsd is using ring0 and it fails will ring1 not be used at all? > >> > >> Pcs and pcsd never use ring1, but they are just tools for managing > >> clusters. You can have a perfectly functioning cluster without pcs and > >> pcsd running or even installed, it would be just more complicated to set > >> it up and manage it. > >> > >> Even if ring0 fails, you will be able to use pcs (in somehow limited > >> manner) as most of its commands don't go through network anyway. > >> > >> Corosync, which is the actual cluster messaging layer, will of course > >> use ring1 in case of ring0 failure. > >> > >>> > >>> So in regards to VMware that would mean that the interface should be > >>> configured with a network that can access the vCenter to fence right? > >>> But wouldn't it then use only ring0 so if that fails it wouldn't switch > >>> to ring1? > >> > >> If you are talking about pcmk_host_map, that does not really have > >> anything to do with network interfaces of cluster nodes. It maps node > >> names (parts before :) to "ports" of a fence device (parts after :). > >> Pcs-0.9.x does not support defining custom node names, therefore node > >> names are the same as ring0 addresses. > >> > >> I am not an expert on fence agents / devices, but I'm sure someone else > >> on this list will be able to help you with configuring fencing for your > >> cluster. > >> > >> > >> Tomas > >> > >>> > >>> Thank you! > >>> > >>> pt., 15.03.2019, 13:14 użytkownik Tomas Jelinek <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> napisał: > >>> > >>> Dne 15. 03. 19 v 12:32 Adam Budziński napsal(a): > >>> > Hello Folks,____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > Tow node active/passive VMware VM cluster.____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > /etc/hosts____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > 10.116.63.83 srv1____ > >>> > > >>> > 10.116.63.84 srv2____ > >>> > > >>> > 172.16.21.12 srv2cr1____ > >>> > > >>> > 172.16.22.12 srv2cr2____ > >>> > > >>> > 172.16.21.11 srv1cr1____ > >>> > > >>> > 172.16.22.11 srv1cr2____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > I have 3 NIC’s on each VM:____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > 10.116.63.83 srv1 and 10.116.63.84 srv2 are networks used > >> to > >>> > access the VM’s via SSH or any resource directly if not via a > >>> VIP.____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > Everything with cr in its name is used for corosync > >>> communication, so > >>> > basically I have two rings (this are two no routable networks > >>> just for > >>> > that).____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > My questions are:____ > >>> > > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > __1.__With ‘pcs cluster auth’ which interface / interfaces > should > >>> I use > >>> > ?____ > >>> > >>> Hi Adam, > >>> > >>> I can see you are using pcs-0.9.x. In that case you should do: > >>> pcs cluster auth srv1cr1 srv2cr1 > >>> > >>> In other words, use the first address of each node. > >>> Authenticating all the other addresses should not cause any issues. > >> It > >>> is pointless, though, as pcs only communicates via ring0 addresses. > >>> > >>> > > >>> > __2.__With ‘pcs cluster setup –name’ I would use the corosync > >>> interfaces > >>> > e.g. ‘pcs cluster setup –name MyCluster srv1cr1,srv1cr2 > >>> srv2cr1,srv2cr2’ > >>> > right ?____ > >>> > >>> Yes, that is correct. > >>> > >>> > > >>> > __3.__With fence_vmware_soap > inpcmk_host_map="X:VM_C;X:VM:OTRS_D" > >>> which > >>> > interface should replace X ?____ > >>> > >>> X should be replaced by node names as seen by pacemaker. Once you > >>> set up > >>> and start your cluster, run 'pcs status' to get (amongs other info) > >> the > >>> node names. In your configuration, they should be srv1cr1 and > >> srv2cr1. > >>> > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Tomas > >>> > >>> > __ __ > >>> > > >>> > Thank you! > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > Users mailing list: [email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >>> > > >>> > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > >>> > Getting started: > >>> http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > >>> > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Users mailing list: [email protected] <mailto: > >> [email protected]> > >>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >>> > >>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > >>> Getting started: > >> http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > >>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Users mailing list: [email protected] > >>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >>> > >>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > >>> Getting started: > http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > >>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Users mailing list: [email protected] > >> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >> > >> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > >> Getting started: > http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > >> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list: [email protected] > > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: [email protected] > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
